25 November 2011 1:23 PM

A statesman for the west

The excellent Tim Montgomerie makes the point in a Guardian column today that, having headed a minority government for five years, the Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper last May led his Conservative party to its first majority in two decades. Montgomerie cites this to help his case that David Cameron called it wrong when he decided to ditch conservative ideas for left-wing ones – an argument which I myself have made repeatedly since Cameron was elected party leader.

But Harper deserves attention on his own account. For he is a party leader who appears to have defied political gravity. As a country, Canada is hardly a byword for conservatism: indeed, it is known for its liberal approach to social issues. Yet Harper not only hung on to power for five years as the leader of a minority government but has now pulled off the feat of achieving majority rule.

Part of the explanation is the fact that the opposition Liberal party simply imploded. But the Liberals previously had cause to believe they were the natural party of Canadian government. So what explains this apparent inversion of the natural Canadian order?

Three reasons, and they are closely linked. The first is that -- providing a very clear contrast to the Liberals -- Harper espoused policies which were free of ideology and connected instead to reality, common sense and people’s lived experience.

Second, Harper’s approach is a principled one, cemented as it is into a clear division between right and wrong, truth and lies and thus standing four-square against the ruinous moral relativism and nihilism of the times.

Third, he has had the courage and backbone to stand up for these principles rather than bending to fashion or intimidation. In short, Harper is a leader not a follower.

That is not to say he doesn’t change his position nor take note of public opinion. He is a politician, after all, not a saint. And he has done some things which I personally think were unwise – such as helping depose Gaddafy in Libya.

But the point about Harper is that he is patently guided in large measure by his passionate concern to defend Canada’s national interests which he understands are inescapably attached to the bedrock freedoms and other values of the west.

He has shown he is not afraid to take positions which are unpopular with much of the rest of the world, such as downgrading the importance of multilateral institutions or his unflinching support for Israel which cost Canada a seat on the UN Security Council.

He has shown consistently that he understands the civilisational battle in which the west finds itself but which his fellow western leaders minimise or deny.

Unlike the UK, US and other western nations which appear to be suffering from the political equivalent of auto-immune disease, Harper demonstrates that he knows who are Canada’s friends and who its enemies. The result is a bullish stance which provides a stark contrast with the wimpish hand-wringing by the US, UK and Europeans. Two weeks ago, for example, Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird declared :

‘Canada will continue to work with its like-minded allies to take the necessary action for Iran to abandon its nuclear program . . . It is not a question of if, but to what extent, we will act.’

To a large extent, Harper’s foreign policy is founded upon principle. He told Maclean’s magazine that global politics is a ‘struggle between good and bad’ and his actions would be guided by ‘moral clarity.’ At his party’s convention last summer, he said:

‘Strength is not an option. Moral ambiguity, moral equivalence are not options, they are dangerous illusions.’

At home, although he long ago accepted that the battle over gay marriage was lost, he has shown he understands the need to reverse the left’s ‘long march through the institutions’ by, for example, de-funding a range of radical pressure groups and supporting more mainstream ones.

The fundamental reason for Harper’s stunning success is that – unlike the callow Cameroons who have succumbed to the linguistic legerdemain of the left -- he really is a politician of the centre-ground. He does not kow-tow to fashionable left-wing opinion but connects instead with the conservative instincts of the public – the true centre-ground of politics. Indeed one might say that, far from defying political gravity Harper’s success is due to the fact that he does not deny it, because he identifies so strongly with those whose feet remain firmly on the ground.

As a former Canadian Conservative Party staffer Sebastian Way wrote last summer, Harper is also immeasurably boosted by the healthy state of his country’s finances, which to be fair is the result of prudent economic policies going back some two decades during which time the Liberals were in power.

British Conservatives can only dream of such propitious economic circumstances – not to mention majority rule. But the lessons for them of Harper’s success are staring them in the face, if only they could actually see.

Stephen Harper is a gold standard politician. In a world run by political pygmies, he stands out as a true statesman. It may be more than the Canadians who give thanks that he is up there on the world stage in the terrifying months ahead.

Share this article:

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Wow...
Harper elevating our international reputation ? I would suggest that we have never been in lower standing internationally. Those who travel around the world, who used to wear the Canadian flag on packpacks no do not. We are now viewed in the same vein as the Americans. In case you haven't read the newspapers lately, other country's are now regularly dismayed at our current government ( unless of course, you are Israel)
Fiscal prudence ? Harper turned a surplus into a deficit and has no run the largest deficit in Canadian history. EH even denied that we were heading into recession in 2008, despite every economists warning. He even cut a sales tax in a time of financial crisis, which can be almost single handedly responsible for the the deficit. No tax cut, this country is probably not in deficit.
Not based on idiology ? Harper is probably one of the largest idiolologues this country has even seen. He refuses to govern based on statistics, if fact his justice minister was recently quoted as saying "we do not govern on statistics". He cut the census ( the only reliable source of information that the country has to make decisions) because the facts do not support Harper's ideals. In fact, stats from every imaginable source indicated crime rates are falling and are at all time lows, yet Harper says that this is incorrect and "unreported crime" is. He wants to implement new crime policy despite objections from all legal experts including lawyers and judges. Harper is a far right, evangelical Christian and governs as such and plays strongly to his base which, by and large are the rural, religious and less educated segment of the population.

No corruption ? How about "gazebo" Tony Clement who lied about funding for border security and diverted it to send $50 Million dollars into his riding to build gazebo's and toilets. How about the "in and out" scandal that they plead guilty to in court. How about Peter McKay getting caught red handed for using military helicopters for his vacations. What about Conservative callers, calling Liberal riding and spreading lies, getting caught ( and admitting to it) and saying is it "free speech". The list goes on.

Harper has one goal...to regress Canada to the 1950's.
In Harper's mind, everything can be fixed by "more guns and more Jesus"

This sounds more like a Sun News article or a Conservative PR release than anything....something to pander to the 'base"

I have followed Steven Harper's progress all through his minority status as Prime Minister and up to him finally becoming a Majority Government. His statesman qualities are unique in a time when we have seen the Liberals and the NDP constantly whining and bickering. His right-wing attitudes are refreshing in contrast to Liberal Progressive elites who try to satisfy the minorities at the expense of the majorities of the rest of us Canadians. We are a vast country geographically but very tiny in population, yet we are now the envy of the world. The Prime Minister knows the value of immigration as it relates to an aging population and is moving in the right direction. The right to bear arms is as important to us as it is to our American cousins. Banning Gun Registration will save us millions of wasted tax dollars. It will be interesting to see how his government will handle the CBC who receive over a billion dollars from our taxpayers each year. It is a bloated bureaucracy run wild and must be accountable in its spending habits. The CBC is arrogant, biased and built to serve only its own self-interests. Their news broadcasts are so left-wing that they are an embarrassment to free-thinking Canadians. Other news media rely solely on advertising with no handouts from government and survive just fine. Why not the CBC? Its time for them to stand on their own. Then they can keep their bias and let the elites watch them. I thank God every day for Stephen Harper. Now if only our schools and universities would go back to real teaching!

Member of the Quebec wing of the federal Liberal Party were caught stealing millions of taxpayers' money, but yet Chretien brushed it off by stating that no one cares that a 'few million dollars goes missing here and there'. I shall alway remember that quote from a Liberal despite the Liberal apologists' best efforts to cover it up.

"Harper is notable only for his pro-Israel extremism and ignorant views on the Middle East"

..Unlike your pals on the left here in Canada who actively and openly support Islamic extremists through the bought and paid for trade unions and the so called 'peace movement'..

Harper lauded in the International press? I can just hear the leftist heads exploding from here..you sure won't find much positive press coverage for the man here, not with the crypto Marxists who run the MSM, the Communist Broadcasting Company and the Toronto Tsar

John Edwards, you think that being pro-Israel is extreme? That Harper's views are ignorant as regards the Middle East? Do you have the internet in your 'occupy' tent?

Please read the article. These are the days when most of the free world's leaders kiss up and bow to totalitarian theocracies or secular truly radical anti-Western nations, as if they will love us if we bow to their sick agendas.

Back in the 30's it was Churchill who was derided as extremist, and we all know how that went down. Read the article and study geopolitics, not merely Arabist propaganda. Phillips understands. We are in for some truly terrifying times and no, the West is not the cause of the hatred directed towards our civilization.

I would dread the day if Canada were to go the way of most of the EU countries or the US. These are days of propaganda and the bill for these years of delusion are coming due soon - just watch!

Equally disturbing are the irrational haters of the Harper government who are so ideologically-driven that they cannot comprehend the truth in the points outlined in this article, and cannot appreciate the steady and realistic hand which Harper and his ministers have on Canadian interests.

John Edwards, no doubt Harper knows, as should everyone, that "Palestinianism" was founded by Hitler's good friend and Arafat's mentor, the Mufti of Jerusalem. They, in WWII, sided with the Nazis and to this day, have never wavered from their ultimate genocidal goal. The PLO (Fatah) Charter is rather clear about this, as are the charters of Hamas and Hezbollah.

As for caring about Canada, I would argue that you don't. To not accept the threat of Islam, of socialism, of PC thinking to the free person is to be against the free person.

Melanie is so right.PM Harper has made Canada a proud nation again after years of corruption by the Liberal government.As you can see we have a strong group of idiots who blog and hate PM Harper and are in all the blogs in Canada.They are the Liberals and NDP who really have ZERO_NADDA_MINUS_influence in the parliament of Canada now and all they have left is their filthy mouths.But we put up with them,because we are still foolish enough to let a party of Separatists sit in parliament and actually pay them to try and bring Canada to its knees and make it look bad on the world stage.They will never learn and will always be around all over the world.Just like the scammers in the Global warming world.Again,thank goodness that we have Steven Harper to protect us in Canada.God bless him and shame on these haters.

To add to Hagbard's excellent commentary, the Mulroney conservatives also introduced the Goods and Services tax (GST - essentially a VAT). Chretien campaigned in 1993 on eliminating the GST - a situation he reversed with weeks, if not days, of taking office. The revenue from the GST certainly helped reduce the deficit.

Here, in Canda it's been entertaining to watch the left's utter bewilederment over the fact that most Canadians prefer Stephen Harper's Conservatives to either the Liberals or the social democratic NDP.

Unable to figure it out they insist Harper is just some kind of illusion.

Ah, mi oliver seems to think our economic history began in 1993 when the Liberals trounced a thoroughly unpopular Progressive Conservative government. Such are the myths of the Natural Governing Party acolytes here in Canada.

While Messrs Chretien and Martin certainly deserve credit for reducing Federal debt and eliminating the deficit, one has to examine how that was achieved. This is a task that I fear is beyond the typical Liberal, to say nothing of Cumminist-Lite Canada (the NDP).

When Brian Mulroney won a landslide majority in 1984, Canada was an economic basket case. The social spending spree that the Liberals imposed upon the country, and their hide bound protectionism saddled Canada with an enormous debt. Trudeau came close to turning Canada into a third world country. The PC's under Mulroney made real cuts, deep cuts, most of which were very unpopular. But, buy reducing Federal spending, they brought about an operating surplus. There was still a deficit, but this was generated solely by the interest on the existing debt (remember the high interest rates through most of the 1980's?). They did not, through programs or day to day operations add to the deficit or the debt.

In 1993 Mr. Chretien won a landslide majority of his own. It was built largely on lies, in which he promised to reverse what he characterized as the evil, penny pinching of his predecessor, Mulroney. However, truth quickly reared its head, and he realized he needed to change course. To that end, he gave Mr. Martin, his finance minister the task of reducing the deficit and national debt.

Now, here is where we examine the way in which the Liberals appeared to have eliminated the deficit, and reduced the debt. By offloading. In Canada we have a program called "Equlization Payments", whereby the feds redistribute taxes amongst the Provinces to fund social programs, and where the amount received is determined by Provincial taxes. The less one Province can collect in taxes, for whatever reason (typically a poor performing economy that is a reflection itslef of poor Provincial planning), the more that Province will receive to fund medical care, schools and other social programs. Coupled with very large cuts to less popular federal programs (military, corrections, etc), the Liberals reduced spending, at the expense of the Provinces who had previously relied upon the equalization payments (not to mention the"have" provinces did not get back what they considered their fair share of federal taxes).

And presto! They cut the deficit and started to pay down the debt, all without actually making too many cuts to federal programs (if they hadm they would have lost the support of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, who donated millions to their war chest).

It all unravelled when martin's ego took over, and he ousted Chretien, whoi did Martin a bad turn in response by outlawing corporate and union donations to political parties (to be substituted by a public subsidy based on vote counts, which still did not equal the old gravy train of unrestrained financing).

Enter Mr. Harper. Our naive sycophant of the Liberals, mi oliver would have us believe that Mr. Harper has driven the economy into the ground with a deficit of 50 billion dollars. Oh, sorry to burst your bubble, oliver, but remember that deficit was forced upon the Conservatives by the unofficial Lib, Commie-Lite, Bloc Quebecois coalition. In 2008 they demanded massive increases in social spending to "kick start" the economy (which was not showing any of the signs of recession anyway, unlike its US counterpart), or they would cast a vote of non-co0nfidence.

But, hey, for the uninformed, or the disingenuous, oliver's little story sounds good.

"...the healthy state of his country’s finances, which to be fair is the result of prudent economic policies going back some two decades during which time the Liberals were in power"

Preston Manning, the leader of the Official Opposition,pushed very hard for such financial prudence. He even refused to take the rich gold plated pensions offered to all MP (as did his entire Reform Party). I give the Liberals some credit, but not all the credit. Manning has a right wing think tank, and is always a good read.

First the economy being better in Canada is due to another party all together, Canada had a huge debt that was turned into a large (+13Billion) surplus by the Liberal Party under Jean Cretien and Paul Martin which was then frittered away to a very small surplus (4-5 Billion) before the Global meltdown by Stephen Harper and after the meltdown now sits about 50 billion.

And who better than Stephen Harper to export Asbestos to poor countries, thats moral clarity.

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the moderator has approved them. They must not exceed 500 words. Web links cannot be accepted, and may mean your whole comment is not published.